Monitor for Mac Mini

Just got a new MAc mini and now looking for a monitor. Not going to get an Apple thunderbolt one as will get another branded on around 24" or so. I would connect via HDMI or thunderbolt (see below)
Three questions.;

Is it worth getting one more than HD resolution 1920x1080

Would it be worthwhile getting one with a mini display port and would this work with my thunderbolt port out on my mini mac?

Would using a mini display port benefit a higher resolution than 1920x1080?

That really depends on your eyesight and tolerance for "the smallness" of text.

I can't speak for others, only myself. With aging eyesight, I find that it's the SIZE of text that matters, less so than the "clarity".

I -prefer- a "medium resolution" 1920x1080 display (27") because it's just easier for me to read with the display running at native resolution.

Again, this is a personal preference.

"Would it be worthwhile getting one with a mini display port and would this work with my thunderbolt port out on my mini mac?
Would using a mini display port benefit a higher resolution than 1920x1080?"

I think you're confused here as to what the thunderbolt port and minidisplayport actually are.
They are THE SAME port.

When you plug a thunderbolt device into the port, it's a thunderbolt port.
When you plug a minidisplayport connector into it, it becomes a minidisplayport.

That really depends on your eyesight and tolerance for "the smallness" of text.

I can't speak for others, only myself. With aging eyesight, I find that it's the SIZE of text that matters, less so than the "clarity".

I -prefer- a "medium resolution" 1920x1080 display (27") because it's just easier for me to read with the display running at native resolution.

Again, this is a personal preference.

"Would it be worthwhile getting one with a mini display port and would this work with my thunderbolt port out on my mini mac?
Would using a mini display port benefit a higher resolution than 1920x1080?"

I think you're confused here as to what the thunderbolt port and minidisplayport actually are.
They are THE SAME port.

When you plug a thunderbolt device into the port, it's a thunderbolt port.
When you plug a minidisplayport connector into it, it becomes a minidisplayport.

Thanks for that, wasn't 100% sure about the thunderbolt port, but that does help.

Reason why I was asking about the resolution is; if I get and HD one 1920x1080, am I limiting the output resolution of my Mac Mini, below its maximum? if I want to go to the highest possible resolution could I benefit from a higher resolution monitor? Appreciate it may be if I use an HDMI cable, but if I use a mini display port could I get more?

will get another branded on around 24" or so. Is it worth getting one more than HD resolution 1920x1080?

Click to expand...

Careful. A 24 inch computer MONITOR is 1920 x 1200 pixels not x 1080. The extra horizontal lines add an inch to the vertical height of the screen. The reason is a standard 8.5 x 11 inch piece of paper displays at full size on such a monitor.

A high definition television SCREEN is 1920 x 1080 pixels in the ratio 16 : 9.

A 27 inch computer MONITOR is 2560 x 1440 pixels. These dimensions happen to have the same 16 : 9 aspect ratio as a high definition television screen. However, the television signal standard maxes out at 1920 x 1080 pixels.

Assuming it's the latest model, your mini can drive two 2560x1600 (odd that they claim support that vs the standard lower 2560x1440?) displays, using the TB ports. Using HDMI, you can do 1080p at 60, but the refresh rate drops to 30 or so with a 4k display.

As a poster said above, your eyes will be the best judge. I run three 2560x11440 displays on my iMac, and I'm happy as a clam.

Careful. A 24 inch computer MONITOR is 1920 x 1200 pixels not x 1080. The extra horizontal lines add an inch to the vertical height of the screen. The reason is a standard 8.5 x 11 inch piece of paper displays at full size on such a monitor.

A high definition television SCREEN is 1920 x 1080 pixels in the ratio 16 : 9.

A 27 inch computer MONITOR is 2560 x 1440 pixels. These dimensions happen to have the same 16 : 9 aspect ratio as a high definition television screen. However, the television signal standard maxes out at 1920 x 1080 pixels.

Sorry for stealing the thread. What resolution should I be looking at if I hope to get it as close to retina with either a 24 or 27 inch? I don't care much about refresh rate, no gaming. Mostly just coding, reading and such.

In my previous post my 2009 Mac Mini can push "Extended desktop and video mirroring: Simultaneously supports up to 1920 by 1200 pixels on a DVI or VGA display; up to 2560 by 1600 pixels on a dual-link DVI display using Mini DisplayPort to Dual-Link DVI Adapter"

So it looks like 2560 by 1600 is the max it will go. I wonder if that's enough at last for a 24inch. I really like how the text look on the retain displays. Thanks.

My extensive research for 24" monitors that were very good for my 'new to me 2012 Mini' (but not 4K costly) found very many people recommending the Dell U2415 1920 x 1200 UltraSharp. I decided on getting two 24" instead of one 27" because I am used to two monitors and this would yield taller screen space and more width/ screen real-estate. I mostly use Excel spread sheets, MS Word and web browsing. From what I read, if you do not plan to watch movies on your computer (or much) 1200 wide is the much preferred option to the old HD 1080 width!

I purchased for $259.99 each 11/27/15. I kept waiting for the price to drop back to $240 like it was last week (just for a few days). Now it is up slightly to $262.63. . You have seven days that Amazon would 'price match' to their own lower price by refunding the difference. This is not advertised, but Google to find the way to claim this on any w/in 7 day amazon item price drop.

My extensive research for 24" monitors that were very good for my 'new to me 2012 Mini' (but not 4K costly) found very many people recommending the Dell U2415 1920 x 1200 UltraSharp. I decided on getting two 24" instead of one 27" because I am used to two monitors and this would yield taller screen space and more width/ screen real-estate. I mostly use Excel spread sheets, MS Word and web browsing. From what I read, if you do not plan to watch movies on your computer (or much) 1200 wide is the much preferred option to the old HD 1080 width!

I purchased for $259.99 each 11/27/15. I kept waiting for the price to drop back to $240 like it was last week (just for a few days). Now it is up slightly to $262.63. . You have seven days that Amazon would 'price match' to their own lower price by refunding the difference. This is not advertised, but Google to find the way to claim this on any w/in 7 day amazon item price drop.

OP, did you make a monitor choice already?

Click to expand...

Thanks for the input. Do you feel this makes the text as sharp as retina level? I'd really like something that can be at the retina's level of sharpness.

Thanks for the input. Do you feel this makes the text as sharp as retina level? I'd really like something that can be at the retina's level of sharpness.

Click to expand...

I cannot compare to retina as I have only seen these occasionally at Best Buy. I knew I was not going to invest that much into monitors, so I did not look at them really. Much like Fisherman, I was very concerned about text size being too small at native resolution, so 1920 x 1200 actually has smaller text on my 24" monitors than what I am used to and care for. With the 2012 Mini and the Dell U2415 combo, I have four resolution choices: 1920x1200, 1600x1000, 1280x800, 1024x640.

Compared to my old iMac, these U2415's look awesome! Dells 'UltraSharp' monitors are pretty darned good w/ a good reputation. Google them for reviews or check the reviews in the Amazon link above.

The 1600x1000 is a bit smaller text size than my late 2006 20" iMac set at 1344x840. But it is doable vision wise and good that it fits a little more screen info per square foot, so that is a plus. If I break down and get a pair of 'computer glasses' I may be able to go to 1920x1200 smaller text. It would better than using my bifocals (jacked up on my nose LOL)!
YEMV (your Eyes may vary)

I cannot compare to retina as I have only seen these occasionally at Best Buy. I knew I was not going to invest that much into monitors, so I did not look at them really. Much like Fisherman, I was very concerned about text size being too small at native resolution, so 1920 x 1200 actually has smaller text on my 24" monitors than what I am used to and care for. With the 2012 Mini and the Dell U2415 combo, I have three resolution choices: 1920x1200, 1600x1000, yyyy x zzzz.

Compared to my old iMac, these U2415's look awesome! Dells 'UltraSharp' monitors are pretty darned good w/ a good reputation. Google them for reviews or check the reviews in the Amazon link above.

The 1600x1000 is a bit smaller text size than my late 2006 20" iMac set at 1344x840. But it is doable vision wise and good that it fits a little more screen info per square foot, so that is a plus. If I break down and get a pair of 'computer glasses' I may be able to go to 1920x1200 smaller text. It would better than using my bifocals (jacked up on my nose LOL)!
YEMV (your Eyes may vary)

Click to expand...

Thanks! I'll take a look at them

I have some cheap 24 inch from about 5 years ago. Maybe the ultra sharp will look better.

I have some cheap 24 inch from about 5 years ago. Maybe the ultra sharp will look better.

Click to expand...

I have been using an old SOny square 19" connected to my old iMac for years. NOt as good as the iMac but OK. My wife got an LG letter box display (19" ?) that was total crap. Not clear at all (at my resolution). ANd that is what everone one at her work uses... amazingly poor quality.

I edited my new to me Ma Mini resolutions available above, now that Migrattion has finished. Woo Hoo!

Somebody confirmed running two 34" displays at 1440p, with the 2014 Mini.
I'd rather add one 34" display than two 24", TBH.
At work, I've got 2x24" (SuSE Linux), at home a 2012 MacMini with an old 30" HP display + an even older 24" Dell.
But I mainly use the 30" and I've switched my work-setup so that I mainly use the left 24" screen, directly in front of me.
The 30" display gives me 1600 pixels on the Y-axis, which is really handy if you have lots of terminals open or a text-file with a long section in it that you want to view in "one piece".
As for the initial question: yes, it's totally worth it.

I have been using an old SOny square 19" connected to my old iMac for years. NOt as good as the iMac but OK. My wife got an LG letter box display (19" ?) that was total crap. Not clear at all (at my resolution). ANd that is what everone one at her work uses... amazingly poor quality.

I edited my new to me Ma Mini resolutions available above, now that Migrattion has finished. Woo Hoo!

Somebody confirmed running two 34" displays at 1440p, with the 2014 Mini.
I'd rather add one 34" display than two 24", TBH.
At work, I've got 2x24" (SuSE Linux), at home a 2012 MacMini with an old 30" HP display + an even older 24" Dell.
But I mainly use the 30" and I've switched my work-setup so that I mainly use the left 24" screen, directly in front of me.
The 30" display gives me 1600 pixels on the Y-axis, which is really handy if you have lots of terminals open or a text-file with a long section in it that you want to view in "one piece".
As for the initial question: yes, it's totally worth it.

Click to expand...

Thanks guys, I'll start my search. One issue I do have is that I'm still running a 2009 Mac Mini, I hope I can find something that fit. Still a bit confused about all this. I know that I'm running 1080 resolution on my screen, but I guess this ultra sharp will help as well.

The HP I got for free (used, from work), so my only investment was for a Thunderbolt-Adaptor (expensive enough).
Buying one on the internet is a different thing.

You could get a new Dell U3014, though ;-)

Is 1920x1200 really that bad on your eyes?

My parents have a 1080p display and it's noticeably "grainy".

Wouldn't go below 1920x1200 these days.

Click to expand...

I don't even think I have 1920x1200 at home. Let me check again when I get home.

Guys, once again thanks for all the input. I'm actually still running 1920x1080 at home, although they were couple cheap monitors that I have gotten almost 5 years ago, because I wanted to have dual screen.

In the end I ended up getting the U2715H, which is the most resolution my 2009 Mini can push (2560x1440). I think it will be a good change. I'll just have to get use to using one big monitor vs two smaller ones. Although I suppose when I get a new computer in the future I can always tag on another smaller ones, or make the 27inch my secondary monitor (when we are all into the 4k+ region). Once again thanks for the input.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.